Surprise! It's mainly tax cuts for the rich and corporations (who didn't see that coming?), including keeping the Bush tax cuts. Because we all know how well they worked before. After interest it's estimated it will cost 7+ TRILLION dollars over 10 years. Cutting the corporate tax rate from 35% down to 25%, eliminate the estate tax, and smashing regulations.

The Bush tax cuts were an abomination, and never should have been extended by President Obama.

But before criticizing Romney's proposed corporate tax cut (from 35% to 25%) too harshly, please put the U.S. rate in context with other tax rates among OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development) countries. As Romney is quick to point out:

"At least 75 countries, including some of our largest trading partners, have cut their corporate tax rates in just the past four years. Earlier this year, the United Kingdom began incrementally reducing its corporate rate, first from 28% to 26%, with the goal of reaching 23% in 2014. In January, Canada cut its rate from an already low 18% to 16.5%, with another reduction to 15% scheduled for next year. Aside from these major trading partners, there is broad movement among OECD nations in the same direction. Excluding the United States, combined statutory rates among OECD nations fell from an average of about 48% in the early 1980s to 25.5% in 2010."

You wonder why businesses aren't hiring in the U.S.? Because (1) labor has outpriced itself, compared to Third-World labor; and (2) corporate taxes are NOT competitive with most of the rest of the world's developed countries.

If you admit they are paying 0 at 35% what is the difference at 25%. The rate is important, but certain industries have gamed the system to the point they can make 14 billion in profit yet pay no taxes (GE, among others). It is about having a low rate, but very little in the way of special deals.

Being harsh on Mitt, but nothing on Obama continuing to cut the rate on SS from the worker side? Possibly now the employer side too? Isn't SS broke, and the biggest overhang (more like the the biggest slush fund, that the pols drain) on the economy. That major future unfunded liability.

The only plans I'll buy into are ones that lowers rates, but broaden the base. Between the 50% that pay nothing, GE, and Buffet (his cap gains is 15%, his secretary closer to top marginal) yacking about his rate, I'm ready to kill a mother fucker.

Not really kill, just angry message board kill.

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

My point is you have to close the loopholes that allow these companies to stash money overseas. Obviously Mitt wouldn't do that to his own.

I don't understand the logic in thinking that lowering the CTR will suddenly make cheap foreign labor any less appealing. Like they'll suddenly drop those people for Americans. I'd still like to know who is going to pay for all the lost revenue in giving tax breaks to people who don't need them.

And you don't need to bring up Obama, I hate him, he's a weak pussy president. I won't vote for him..... or any of these shitheads. Same rule as Brainless II, if Obama were drowning i'd throw him a cinder block.

At first (only glancing, long hair, red looking outfit) I was thinking is that from Highlander? Then I just kinda got this feeling I was looking at Sean Connery (right?) for too long.

BTW if I wasn't clear in my post I agree it isn't the rate as much as it is the loopholes. If a 35% rate brings 0 the rate isn't quite 35%. Deep in my accounting knowledge is buried the concept that lower rates = better compliance = greater revenue. Bush's maligned rates (the lowest also chopped from 15% to 10%) brought in the highest revenues, that included the lower cap gains. IMO, the we aren't at that max revenue number and its beacuse we have high rates with too many loopholes. Also lets allow those foreign profits to come back into this country untaxed.

Taint all about cheap labor. Balance sheets are flush with cash, but they are all scared to spend any of it. Just like the consumer is afraid to pluck down any money. I'll be glued to tomorrow's debate. Hopefully the eventual nominee gets Gingrich as VP, even though I hoped he'd win outright.

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Surprise! It's mainly tax cuts for the rich and corporations (who didn't see that coming?), including keeping the Bush tax cuts. Because we all know how well they worked before. After interest it's estimated it will cost 7+ TRILLION dollars over 10 years. Cutting the corporate tax rate from 35% down to 25%, eliminate the estate tax, and smashing regulations.

His economic plan could certainly use more substance, however saying the Bush tax cuts didnt work is unfair. The economy is not a vacuum, too many moving parts to blame economic success or failure on one policy. The bigger reason tax receipts are down is the economic doldrums we have been in for a decade, not lower rates. Additionally, people saying the stagnant growth of the last decade was because of the tax cuts is just dishonest. Once again too many moving pieces. The lack of growth can also be blamed for a large majority of the debt/deficit. Get things growing again and tax receipts are not an issue, nor is the deficit nearly as much of an issue.

Complaining about corporate tax rates is just a political rhetoric as well. Corporate tax receipts are less than 10% of the money brought in by the government. The only way it becomes a much larger share is if we eliminate loopholes... which certainly seems like a tricky task, there are absolutely direct and tangible effects of increases taxes on businesses, especially the big ones that democrats love to hate. GE doesn't pay a lick in corporate taxes, but are we not better with them employing the Americans they do? Crappy situation, but in a global economy that's the way the game is played. Lower the rates but eliminate the loopholes to try to even things up for the companies who can not move jobs overseas.

In reality nothing will be done. Too polarized. Unless one party controls both houses with a filibuster majority no major legislation with any teeth will be implemented again.

Oh, and concerning the tax cuts, I can make the same argument for them as the Democrats make for the stimulus... imagine how bad things would have been if not for them if they are this bad now!!! Isnt that what we hear? What a joke. "but it created or SAVED (love this) 3.6 million jobs"... do the math on that. 218K per job created or saved. Great program.

Hey just watch Zero give his job speech. Spent the better part of it bailing out public and construction unions, again. When you continue to keep people employed with one-time money, you do not solve any fundemental issues, just guarantee that you will have to have one-time money again. Then he starts blaming congress. Finally stating that this will not add to the defecit by engaging in class warfare.

So in totality its bsically lets take money from the evil rich and give it to the unions that will vote me back into office. I'm sure he will do a pretty good job protecting "his" rich buddies. Fuck, Gibson guitars.

Oh, I thought it was over, but he is now smearing Congress again and oh, here he goes again talking about the folks not being able to wait 14 months for Congress to act. This guy is a abject joke.

ETAHa ha ha call your congressman and tell them to pass this bill now. Only thing stopping it (this jobs bill) is politics. You fucking dolt you have been doing this for 3 years with zip as a result. God I'm about to lose my mind.

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

Guess what. Moron Bush and his TARP program has been the only successful aspect of this 5 year bailout bonanza. His $350 million portion was the only part paid back with interest, and is accountableand auditable. Obama also did a good job with his portion of TARP, but his is more difficult to account for due to saving the auto industry. Lots of games were played with the payback by GM (which still owes more/paid a portion back with by swapping a Treasury slush fund for more equity) and Chrysler, hard to quantify the difference between saving those jobs as is and a bankruptcy.

ETAI have not read Mitt's plan and am sure its filled with BS that will never happen. Best bet, IMO, is for a complete takeover by the GOP in 2012, only then can they bully through the needed fundemental changes.

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

Orenthal wrote:ETAI have not read Mitt's plan and am sure its filled with BS that will never happen. Best bet, IMO, is for a complete takeover by the GOP in 2012, only then can they bully through the needed fundemental changes.

President Obama’s re-election campaign is doing a contest where contributors can win a chance to have dinner with the president. Or, if you come in 2nd place, a mid-afternoon Hot Pocket with Joe Biden.

Mitt Romney’s campaign is offering a chance to win a day with Romney. It’s called, “Vote for Mitt Romney or else you’ll have to spend a day with Mitt Romney.”

"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns